Question 7State law · Citizen initiative
Allow smaller-lot homes
Explain it like I'm 5
Some towns require very large lots before anyone can build a house. This would allow a single-family house on a qualifying lot of at least 5,000 square feet with public water and sewer, while keeping some local building rules.
Yes vote
A yes vote requires cities and towns to allow qualifying single-family homes on residential lots of at least 5,000 square feet.
No vote
A no vote keeps current state and local rules on minimum lot sizes.
The question to ask yourself
Should the state require smaller-lot housing, or should each community control its own minimum lot sizes?
The case for
- Could make more starter homes possible.
- Smaller lots could reduce the land cost per home.
- It preserves local rules on height, setbacks, parking, and similar requirements.
Backed by: Legalize Starter Homes, Abundant Housing Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey, League of Women Voters of Massachusetts
The case against
- Overrides local zoning decisions.
- Does not require homes to be affordable or small.
- Could increase pressure on roads, schools, drainage, water, or sewer systems.
Opposed by: Massachusetts Municipal Association
- Money
- The official fiscal statement finds no discernible material fiscal consequences for state or municipal finances; any local effects from new housing are not estimated.
- Don't be misled
- Calling it a starter-home guarantee is misleading because it sets lot rules, not home prices or house size.